Just A Few General Questions

[Henge Keeper]

I have been tossing around the idea of creating my own table top role playing system for a little while now, and I have decided that there were some questions that I thought would be important to answer before I get underway. in addition I stumbled upon this forum, and figured this would be a great place to get some good feed back. Essentially I will be tossing around some ideas that have floated through my head, and I was hoping to get some feedback.

First off basic questions. If you have any additional ideas, or recommendations, to were I might be able to find some good references feel free to let me know.

1. What type of things would you like to see in a new role play that would be coming out, and what qualities do you think are most important? A few ideas that have been mentioned to me include; flexibility, simplicity, relative realism, originality.

2. What do you think about the idea of removing any sort of class system? I figured you could break down any character into a fighter, thief, spell castor, or a combination there of. Essentially stats, skills, and spells with a few added abilities here and there. I was contemplating the idea of a point based leveling system, where a character could put things into any of these areas.

3. What is your opinion on a point based rune magic system?

4. What do you think about a damage reduction armor system?

5. Should I look at going with high number system, or a low number system?

6. I was considering a D20 system or a D100 system. What are peoples thoughts on both of these?

Those are a few of the most basic questions that I have been wondering about. i will probably post some more questions when I remember or come up with a few more.

[ODDin]

1. What type of things would you like to see in a new role play that would be coming out, and what qualities do you think are most important? A few ideas that have been mentioned to me include; flexibility, simplicity, relative realism, originality.

Different people want different things. As we are indie developers, not major companies, I believe that one should be doing what *he* wants to do. That doesn't mean you shouldn't accept criticism, but this does mean that when you start doing something, it should be your own idea. If you haven't got at least a general idea of where you're going, I don't see why you're doing this.
Also, review the GNS model (there are articles on this site), to see what people normally want from RPGs.

2. What do you think about the idea of removing any sort of class system? I figured you could break down any character into a fighter, thief, spell castor, or a combination there of. Essentially stats, skills, and spells with a few added abilities here and there. I was contemplating the idea of a point based leveling system, where a character could put things into any of these areas.

Myself, I don't really like classes. But it all depends on what you're trying to create, the feel you're trying to give and the level of complexity you're willing to have. Classes help by making things easier, but reduce the realism and the available options of the characters.

3. What is your opinion on a point based rune magic system?

Perhaps you're referring to something you expect others to be familiar with, in which case I'm not and I'm sorry, but if this is not the case - then "a point based rune system" isn't nearly enough to say anything on the subject.

4. What do you think about a damage reduction armor system?

That:
a. It's more realistic than what D&D has, and you're obviously thinking along the lines of D&D.
b. It's a bit pointless to discuss so early in the designing phase.
c. For that matter, there's a rule in Unearthed Arcana (NOT Arcana Unearthed) that changes the AC bonus of armour to a combination of AC bonus and DR. Read it if you wish.

5. Should I look at going with high number system, or a low number system?

Again, this depends on the feel. If you want the feel of "gritty realism", to use the term from The Riddle of Steel, or the general feel of humans being puny and insignificant, small numbers are better. If you want the characters to be epic and heroic, Exalted-style, then high numbers are better. Not that these feels can't essentially be achieved without the appropriate numbers, or that these are all the feels available, but these are just examples.

6. I was considering a D20 system or a D100 system. What are peoples thoughts on both of these?

I prefer d20, because I find it much more intuitive, easy to grasp and easy to work with, all the while not less realistic than most other systems. As for d100, there are many systems that use d100. I am familiar with Call of Cthulhu and Unknown Armies, and I also know that Shadowrun uses d100, but that I've never played or read; and there are probably a lot more. I personally find it rather cumbersome, especially when it comes to opposed checks.

[ODDin]

Regarding question 6: When I said there were many systems that used d100, I meant to ask: exactly what way do you want to use your d100? just saying "d100" is not like saying "d20".

[Moreno R.]

Hi!

The Forge isn't really a place to ask OTHERS what they would like in a RPG (That is the sort of general, unfocussed and frankly useless kind of advice you could find everywhere)  To get the most from THIS site, (and from this forum "first thoughts" in particular) it would be better if you follow the procedure delineated in the post "Rules for the First Thoughts forum"

Citing from the fist post: "This forum is for working through early drafts and posing design questions about the fundamental concepts for new games. If you're starting a thread here, then it's very important for you to make specific inquiries and to raise specific points - don't post a ton of material and ask "what do you think," because it won't help much."

The thread I linked above has a ton of useful link to help you understand what YOU want from your game, and how to post specific and focussed question here.  For example, if you see the older thread you'll find that many designers have found very useful to write and post their answer to the "Power 19" questions.

[Valamir]

Henge, a couple of points.

First, opinion polls are worse than useless.  They will more often than not lead you exactly in the wrong direction, which is why the Forge heavily discourages them.

Second, and vastly more important IMO, don't design a game for what other people want.  Design what YOU want.  What gets you fired up.  Design around that.  If you're not totally 100% stoked about your idea...it'll never get finished anyway, so don't waste your time.

Third, your questions display a fairly focused past history of gaming:  Point based magic, damage reduction armor, classes.  Gaming encompasses a whole universe of possibilities that go way beyond these sorts of things.  Before leaping into any new design project, I recommend becoming familiar with games which have radically different solutions to questions like this, just to be aware of what's out there and what can be done with a game design.

[ODDin]

Having reread the original post, I'm suddenly not sure; by "high/low numbers" - do you mean a system that uses big and pompous versus small and more ordinary numbers (the question I answered), or do you mean a system that is heavy on math and calculations versus a system that is not?

To answer that question too, at any rate: Yet again, this depends on what you want. Narrativism loathes math-heavy systems, as it normally slows down the pace of the game. Simulationism accepts that, as this usually helps make things more realistic. Gamism usually accepts it too, if done properly, for the sake of balance and more options.

Plus, I really agree with the two who posted before me.


Michael Pevzner

[Henge Keeper]

Okay. so I got some in put from a few of my friends that I role play with. essentially what i am looking at is a system designed to be as flexable as possible with characters, and what they can do, at the same time I am aiming a maintaing a good level of relative realizm. for now I am running under HENGE as the working title. After further wok I have decided that I am going to use a point buy system for character creation. Essentially each character will have a certain number of points to put into Stats, Skills, Spells, or Special Abilities. THis way a character can be more organic than the class systems that I am familiar with. The stats that I am going to work with are Streangth, Constitution, Agility, Perception, Intelligence, Willpower, and Charisma. I feel this gives a realistic, spread of abilities without becoming overly complicated. I think I am going to go with a percentile d100 sytem, and run higer numbers. this way a common person would hit another common person about fifty percent of the time, and hit an  exceptionally fast person almost never, if it is even possible. In addition since I am going for realism I think I am going to go with the damage reduction system for armor since it doesn't actually stop some one from getting hit it, simply makes the hits hurt less.

In reguards to the rune magic system. Essentially I was thinking that magic would be activated by concentrating on a rune that was marked on an item. So the castor would have to write the rune correctly in order to cast the spell. The point part was going to basicly run with the idea that a spell can become more powerfull in many different ways. The higer level the spell you cast the more points you could put into upgrading different parts of the spell for instance range.

Currently I am setting this system up for a setting that primarily references celtic, and germanic mythos.

[ODDin]

The question I ask myself when I see a new system designed, or when I sit down to design something myself, is: what is new and different about this system, what does it do that other systems don't, why should I play it and not something else?

This is a question that should, in my opinion, guide you through the design. However, I don't really see an answer to this question. The abilities are what you basically get in every generic RPG, point buy system is also used a lot, you're implying to the use of hit points and damage, which is again quite generic, rune magic by itself isn't novel, and the usage of points sounds to me like more or less mana.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that if it's been used before (a lot) it can't be used again. You don't have to go reinventing the wheel, especially if what is around fits your needs.
However, all of this isn't what you should be speaking about right now. I want to see what your system does that is actually new and interesting - armour with DR doesn't nearly satisfy that, especially considering that this, too, has been done before. The magic system sounds like what you're really working on as something new - elaborate on that then. Or, if you're aiming for an interesting setting, not necessarily interesting rules, that's also ok - elaborate on the setting, then.
Bottom line, elaborate on something, so that we can see what makes your system interesting.

[Justin Nichol - BFG]

Just my own little two cents, and gripes. Point buy systems are fine, go for it. But in my humble opinion, realism should be a secondary design goal. I think you should have rules that don't scream out to people that's dumb that could never happen, but who cares if it's realistic if it's not fun or dramatic. Also, I personally dislike linear dice a great deal (D20's and D100's) because I have bad luck with dice. Maybe that's why I tend to be attracted to things that emphasize roleplaying and have a significant bell curve in their dice rolls.

[Vulpinoid]

But in my humble opinion, realism should be a secondary design goal. I think you should have rules that don't scream out to people that's dumb that could never happen, but who cares if it's realistic if it's not fun or dramatic.

I'm 100% behind this one.

This can be looked at from other perspectives. You could consider the metaphysical concept of "What is realism, and what is reality?" which has seen hundreds of arguments on dozens of forums across the web, what do the characters percieve as realoty, what do the player's perciev as reality, and where do the two touch?

You could think through the quantum phenomenon where the higher the accuracy in measuring an electron's location, the less accuracy is attained in determining it's velocity. The same works for roleplaying games. The more you try to detail the moment and perfectly guage the physics of the situation, the more disruption you have to the flow of the events. Conversely, the more you maintain the flow of the game, the more sacrifices you have to make to the "realism".

Most of the games I've enjoyed have employed a levek of "cinematic realism". Most things work like they do in the real world, but a few things have been turned up or down a notch to keep the flow of the story occuring.

Also, I personally dislike linear dice a great deal (D20's and D100's) because I have bad luck with dice. Maybe that's why I tend to be attracted to things that emphasize roleplaying and have a significant bell curve in their dice rolls.

I know quite a few people who agree with this one, and who consider the roleplaying over once the dice hit the table. But I guess everyone's different in this regard. As has been pointed out in other threads, some people believe the fall of the die is what the game is all about.

V

[Justin Nichol - BFG]

Well I certainly like to remember I'm playing a game, and I don't play diceless because I like a little randomness. I just understand that random outcomes do not produce drama or tension, only annoyance when at least once per game your character fails at doing something either very important or very routine and you don't feel at all like the heroic center of the tale as you just tripped into a pit because of a bad die roll. I personally tend to like A. Bell Curves so that things tend to fall near the middle and reflect a more reasonable range for a characters skills, B. games where the outcome of the die rolls don't dwarf the actual skill of the character in importance. Think about it, in D&D, a character who is three levels higher than another character, and both of them have the skill at max, all that's keeping them from the same level of skill is a modest difference in die rolls. Honestly I've seen really silly stuff before where a Ranger gets a piss-poor roll of 3 or something on their Survival skill, and someone with a Survival skill of 2 as a backup rolls a 16 and somehow knows more about survival than the ranger. I just dont like linear dice rolls because of that.

Also C. I like when games allow for resolution outside of the dice when possible, not just recommend it but actually build it into the system.

[ODDin]

1. On the realism.
I simply have to note that different people like different things. I, for instance, am pretty much a simulationist, and it is quite important for me that things make logical sense - even if it slows down the game, sometimes. Not that I claim that this is the only approach; actually, it seems to me that simulationists are a minority. But I just had to point it out.

2. On the dice.
The bigger problem in my opinion is not the linearity but the relation between the size of the die and the ranks of skills. As in Justin's example, when a ranger rolls a 3 and somebody with a low Survival skill rolls high, it makes little sense. However, had D&D used, for instance, 1d6 instead of 1d20, the relation between the size of the die and the skill ransk would make a lot more sense. It is even more of a problem with ability scores. The differnce between 10 (normal human level) and 16 (incredible beyond-human level) is an effective 3 in the rolls. Compared to the size of the d20, it's nothing. So, in using a d20-like system, my suggestion is to have the dice much smaller than the numbers of the characters' characteristics (abilities, skills, traits, whatever).
Also, yes, using dice to create a bell curve (3d6, for instance) is also a good idea.

[Ron Edwards]

Hey guys,

This is a moderator post. There are still a couple of problems in this thread that must be resolved if I'm going to allow it to continue.

First, to Henge Keeper, you are still catering to others. Your latest post told us what your friends told you they wanted. Very bluntly, to hell with your friends, relative to your posts here. If they want to post here regarding games they want to design, then that would be fine. But when someone asks you, "What game do you want to design," and you say, "My friends tell me to design X and Y," then that's right off the radar screen for the Forge. This place is only about what you want to design. Pleasing your friends is not anyone else's problem.

Let us know what kind of game you want to design.

Second, to everyone else, you are still responding as if it were a poll. I appreciate the effort you're putting in. However, please do not post as if you were a potential customer filling out a want-list, especially about empty qualities like realism and features-in-isolation like die size (see my essays if you are interested in why I say this). Clearly Henge Keeper has not yet told us what he wants to design. Until he does, there is absolutely nothing constructive that you can post, no matter how heartfelt or relevant to you that it might be. So stop posting until we see what he needs.

Best, Ron

[Henge Keeper]

Sorry, about that Ron. most of the ideas I have posted have been my own, I just like to bounce ideas off of people, and my friends were very helpful with that. In fact most of the posts on here have been very helpful. In reguards to what i want, well here it goes.

I have been thinking about making my own rpg system for quite a while now, and have even worked out some formulas, and other ideas for the game. What I have been trying to create is a game mainly working around the idea of flexibility. It is for this reason that i am not working with a class system of any type. I essentially wanted to make a game where a player could work towards any type of character, or have there character attempt to do what ever they can imagine. I also wanted to work towards a level of relative realism with the game. In other words if one person is doing amazing cinematic things, then I think that everyone including enemys should be doing amazing cinematic things as well. In other words I wanted to maintain realism in the idea that things within the game are constant, and balanced.

I admit my table top role playing experience is mostly limited to 3 and 3.5 D&D. However, I do have experience with playing a table top rpg called "rocks fall and everyone dies". I also have experience with play by post narrativist games. and other improvisational dice less role playing. Over all I can safely say that my favorite part about role playing is the development of characters, i guess this is one of the reasons I feel that the class system is to restrictive. Secondly, I enjoy playing the game, and the mental challenges that can be created by a good GM. It is for these reasons that I would like to make a rpg system that embodies these qualities, while maintaining a constant withing the mechanics of the system.

In regards to originality, i am aware that my most original aspects of my game are the setting which is a world that i have been designing with my brother for quite a while, and my magic system that has developed there in. The magic system I have created requires a spell caster to write his or her runes ahead of time. The caster must then focus on the rune when they wish to cast the spell. If they have written the rune incorrectly then there are a who list of nasty side effects that can come about. Either way casting the spell causes the rune, and what it has been written on to turn to dust, as the magical energies of the rune pour forth, contorled by the casters streangth of will. The way spells become more powerfull would be to write a stronger rune, which is more difficult ot get correct. The extra energy can then be focused into different aspects of the spell.

So, there you go. I think that covers a good chunk of the issues at hand. I hope that this is acceptable. Sorry about not posting sooner I have been rather busy as of late.

[Simons]

Dear Henge,

So, I hope this is not too poll-ish of a response.  If it is, I'm sorry, and Ron can yell at me or take it down.  That said, since you said you have a somewhat limited experience with tabletop rpgs...

First, I'm not going to recommend any of them, but know that there are a lot of options out there for luck generators.  Since you seem like you might be looking for ideas, here are a few I've come across (just to see if anything piques your interest).  Linear (d6, d20, d100, etc), bell-curve (2d6, 3d6, 5d4), and diceless systems have already been mentioned.  In Great Orc Gods, a character takes 1 strength check to lift a rock and 3 strength checks to lift a boulder.  In HeroScape, how strong you are determines the number of attack dice you roll, and the more times you pass the more damage you do.  I have seen games that use a deck of cards (such as Fairy Meat), and I think I've seen one that uses tarot cards.  You could do something just silly and fun (no examples come to mind, though I'm sure I've seen them).  Heck, you could probably even have some kind of strategy system (like, draw 10 cards, each of these is the result of one of your checks.  You can play them whenever you want, but you must play them all to get new ones, so you better save your 10s for something important and 2s for something you can afford to lose) (given your post this one's probably a no).  And, I'm sure if you browsed around on the internet long enough, you could find twice as many ideas, just by free download or demo games.  All of these can be made to work, though some work better for different situations, I guess it's all about what you like the best. 

If you do choose to go with the linear system, I have always felt that the dice you choose is a trade-off between fidelity and hassle.  Using a d6 is simple.  You almost never have to add anything bigger than a 5, and everyone has a d6.  Unfortunately, the difference between a 2 and a 3 is 17%.  That, and you can probably only have 5 types of armor (defense of 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6).  In terms of d20 vs. d100, here are what I see as the main things to consider: 1) to roll a d100, you need two dice rather than one; 2) in terms of modifiers, 18+17 is more complicated to add than 3+4; 3) on a single straight roll, a d100 will be more accurate than a d20 either 3% or 5% of the time (depending on how you round); 4) penalties and advantages add up faster on a d20 (i.e. a -1-1-2-1 on a d20 totals -5, or 25%.  -3-2-3-5 on a d100 totals only 13%).  Although, honestly, my last 3 games were based around a d8, d10, and d12, so know that the choice doesn't just come down to those two possibilities.  And realize you don't need to base your game around one type of dice. 

But, as Ron said, it's impossible to make a recommendation on dice types without knowing more specifically what you want your system to be like. 

The last things I'd say is this: I don't want to discourage you, but if you want a game with an original setting, and cool character design and magic system, why not just make a d20 System expansion?  Heck, check out BESM d20 (I think) or d20 Modern (where classes are less limiting than D&D) for something less class based.  I guess this comes from the "why reinvent the wheel" comment.  Why do you want to create an entirely new game, with a new skill system, new combat system, etc?  I mean, if the answer is just this great internal desire to create, then wonderful (that's honestly why I've made most games).  And I honestly will feel bad if this discourages you from going.  I don't want you to not make the game because of this post, just figure out why you are making it. 

I hope that helps.  Best of luck!

Simon